linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] MFD: MAX8997: IRQ definition moved to public header.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 4 Jul 2011 10:16:37 -0700
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>,
	Donggeun Kim <dg77.kim@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] MFD: MAX8997: IRQ definition moved to public header.

On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 09:43:31AM +0900, MyungJoo Ham wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Mark Brown

> > This looks like charger specific configuration which should be done by
> > the charger driver rather than by directly working with the IRQs?

> Well, the issue is that the charger driver just does not know what to
> do with its own interrupts.

> For example, each board has different regulator setting for DCIN
> depending on the specification of the board (some uses 450mA
> constantly, some uses 450mA and 700mA depending on the connection
> information, which is not known to charger driver, some uses 900mA
> unconditionally, and so on).

That sounds like the charger driver just needs some platform data.

> Sometimes setting the attributes of a charger at its own interrupts
> depends on the status of another charger; when we have USB charger,
> wireless charger, and solar panels, which may be enabled independently
> and have their own device drivers.

My understanding was that one of the goals of the power_supply subsystem
was to support this sort of interaction?  This (and your subsequent
paragraphs) all sounds entirely sensible but it should be being dealt
with at a higher level with the various charger drivers delivering
events into a subsystem or board driver which coordinates them all.  It
seems like the driver should be doing the work of dealing with the
actual interrupts.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/